Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 9227136" data-attributes="member: 82106">I think this may be at least a part of it, but I dispute the 'failed' part. I mean, Mearles didn't get the axe and a lot of the game comes down to him! He wrote that awful adventure, etc. No, I think there were issues with the whole DDI business model, licensing etc. AS WELL AS presentation problems. Clearly even if you can appeal to a lot of new/lapsed players (4e got me back) enough of the older active ones were out or lukewarm to cancel a lot of the gains. Finally they went WAY far in the 'publish a huge heap of material ' direction, and that proved to be a poor choice. I agree that the game itself needs to assert it's nature more clearly and define itself as a Narrativist system, but I don't think it failed, nor that it's primarily the nature of the system that limited its market. 5e's success is built on the success of 4e in making D&D a more viable and popular property. I don't think 5e, launched in 2008 would be the successful product it is without 4e to leverage.</blockquote>